US War College professor accuses Mossad of 9/11

The 9/11 related stuff begins about 20min into the show.

I think that there is a lot of indirect evidence pointing at the fact that Israel had a key role in the 9/11 events. I have, however, no idea how Dr. Sabrosky came to the conclusion that it was 100% certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. There is an expression which KGB officers like to use. They say that "it is important that the ears not stick out" (in a covert operation) referring to the image of a dog, or wolf, hiding behind an object with his ears visibly sticking out. I would say that I clearly see the "ears" of the Israelis "sticking out behind the burning WTC buildings". Alas, "seeing ears" is far from being a proof of anything.

What do you guys think? Does anybody know of any good evidence of Israeli involvment?




Try this

Try this link

from Veterans Affairs that's been posted. Check out the links in the comments.

Israeli involvement

The Dark Face of Jewish (transcript)

The Dark Face of Jewish Nationalism

9/11 - The US Military Knows Israel Did It

Audio interview below

By Dr Alan Sabrosky

March 19, 2010 "
Redress" - -Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu once remarked to a Likud gathering that "Israel is not like other countries". Oddly enough for him, that time he was telling the truth, and nowhere is that more evident than with Jewish nationalism, whether or not one pins the "Zionist" label on it.

Nationalism in most countries and cultures can have both positive and negative aspects, unifying a people and sometimes leading them against their neighbours. Extremism can emerge, and often has, at least in part in almost every nationalist/independence movement I can recall (e.g. the French nationalist movement had The Terror, Kenya's had the Mau Mau, etc.).

But whereas extremism in other nationalist movements is an aberration, extremism in Jewish nationalism is the norm, pitting Zionist Jews (secular or observant) against the goyim (everyone else), who are either possible predator or certain prey, if not both sequentially. This does not mean that all Jews or all Israelis feel and act this way, by any means. But it does mean that Israel today is what it cannot avoid being, and what it would be under any electable government (a point I'll develop in another article).

The differences between Jewish nationalism (Zionism) and that of other countries and cultures here I think are fourfold:

1. Zionism is a real witches' brew of xenophobia, racism, ultra-nationalism and militarism that places it way outside of a "mere" nationalist context — for example, when I was in Ireland (both parts) I saw no indication whatsoever that the Provisional Irish Republican Army or anyone else pressing for a united Ireland had a shred of design on shoving Protestants into camps or out of the country, although there may well have been a handful who thought that way — and goes far beyond the misery for others professed by the Nazis;

2. Zionism undermines civic loyalty among its adherents in other countries in a way that other nationalist movements (and even ultra-nationalist movements like Nazism) did not — e.g. a large majority of American Jews, including those who are not openly dual citizens, espouse a form of political bigamy called "dual loyalty" (to Israel and the US) that is every bit as dishonest as marital bigamy, attempts to finesse the precedence they give to Israel over the US (lots of Rahm Emanuels out there who served in the Israeli army but NOT in the US armed forces), and has absolutely no parallel in the sense of national or cultural identity espoused by any other definable ethnic or racial group in America — even the Nazi Bund in the US disappeared once Germany and the US went to war, with almost all of its members volunteering for the US armed forces;

3. The "enemy" of normal nationalist movements is the occupying power and perhaps its allies, and once independence is achieved, normal relations with the occupying power are truly the norm, but for Zionism almost everyone out there is an actual or potential enemy, differing only in proximity and placement on its very long list of enemies (which is now America's target list); and

4. Almost all nationalist movements (including the irredentist and secessionist variants) intend to create an independent state from a population in place or to reunite a separated people (like the Sudeten Germans in the 1930s) — it is very rare for it to include the wholesale displacement of another indigenous population, which is far more common of successful colonialist movements as in the US — and perhaps a reason why most Americans wouldn't care too much about what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians even if they DID know about it, is because that is no different than what Europeans in North America did to the Indians/Native Americans here in a longer and more low-tech fashion.

The implications of this for Middle East peace prospects, and for other countries in thrall to their domestic Jewish lobbies or not, are chilling. The Book of Deuteronomy come to life in a state with a nuclear arsenal would be enough to give pause to anyone not bought or bribed into submission — which these days encompasses the US government, given Israel's affinity for throwing crap into the face of the Obama administration and Obama's visible affinity for accepting it with a smile, Bibi Netanyahu's own "Uncle Tom" come to Washington.

The late General Moshe Dayan, who — Zionist or not — remains an honoured part of my own Pantheon of military heroes, allegedly observed that Israel's security depended on its being viewed by others as a mad dog. He may have been correct. But he neglected to note that the preferred response of everyone else is to kill that mad dog before it can decide to go berserk and bite. It is an option worth considering.

Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D, University of Michigan) is a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran and a former director of studies at the US Army War College. He can be contacted at

9/11 - The US Military Knows Israel Did It

The Ugly Truth Podcast

Broadcast March 15, 2010

Dr. Alan Sabrosky, talks with co-host Phil Tourney to discuss Dr. Sabrosky’s most recent article “The Dark Face Of Jewish Nationalism”.

What is the point of posting this here

without comment?

I realize that you made a comment above that seems to cover what you think about this, but for the sake of clarity you should also have included a critique of it with this comment. This is a very controversial subject, to day the least, and it is far too easy for mis-understandings to arise around it, as appears to have happened below.

I think it most unfortunate that this blog appeared on the site before Dr. Sabrosky and everything having to do with this was thoroughly vetted. It looks very much like a set-up to me.

In any case, attacks on other users are a clear violation of site rules and will not be tolerated.

Please keep your comments civil and do not bring previous disagreements or disputes from other sites onto 911Blogger.

Thank you.

It's easier to discuss a document than an audio recording

I simply posted the text because it seemed easier to assess it in written form than in an audio recording. I wasn't taking a position on his statements. I was merely trying to facilitate a better understanding of what he had said.

If nothing else

If readers get nothing else out of this thread, watch the vids I posted for credible info regarding Israeli involvement (at the very least, foreknowledge) of 9/11. You can't get a more mainstream source than CBS or FOX news.

Somemore leads

I really wish I could speak freely on this matter. Your desire to discuss the question of Mossad involvement is well placed. Unfortunately the perpetrators have surround us with socio-political land mines. If you do follow this line of investigation bear in mind there is also evidence pointing to Cheney, Bremmer and others who are not directly connected to the Mossad, per se. See also the 07/24/01, WTC Privatization Agreement and Blackstone's acquisition of debt on WTC 7.

Operation Cyanide and

My response from

This is my response from the thread at

I finally got a chance to listen to this podcast.

What do I think?

I think it's a real shame. I think it's a shame that Dr. Sabrosky feels comfortable going on record making such an inflammatory accusation without even bothering to offer a single shred of evidence, much less anything solid. I think it's downright creepy that he quickly tops this evidence-free assertion by calling for Israel to be wiped off the face of the planet and even implying that all Jews might need to be done away with in order to save the USA. Does he really think that the fact that he has a Jewish grandparent makes this kind of bigotry and warmongering OK? Incredible.

I removed the link to the site because it leads directly to David Duke and holocaust revisionism which I'm not at all keen to feature on this site. If people are interested in hearing the podcast it's easy enough to find. Discussion of Mossad involvement in 9/11 is fine as long as it can be done factually and without linking to racists.

Also, please see ZIHOP as Limited Hangout

The Eleventh Day of Every Month


I didn't see any promotion of David Duke or holocaust revisionism in the link at the top of the blog entry.

I guess you didn't look too hard

David Duke Link 1
David Duke Link 2
Institute for Historical Review Link 3

The Institute for Historical Review (IHR), founded in 1978, is an American organization that describes itself as a "public-interest educational, research and publishing center dedicated to promoting greater public awareness of history." Critics have accused it of being an antisemitic "pseudo-scholarly body" with links to neo-Nazi organizations, and assert that its primary purpose is to disseminate views denying key facts of Nazism and the genocide of Jews and others. It has been described as the "world's leading Holocaust denial organization."

Do I have a problem with people reading, listening to or discussing David Duke or Holocaust revisionism or anything else whatsoever that they choose? Absolutely not. But any intelligent person who cares about the cause of 9/11 truth will understand why I don't wish to have links to those materials on my site, or here for that matter.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

So what? Wolfe Blitzer interviewed David Duke

So there are interviews with David Duke on the site. Wolfe Blitzer interviewed David Duke. Do you ban links to CNN because of that?

Maybe someone else can explain the difference to you

I'm not going to waste my time on this.


The Eleventh Day of Every Month

Show "..." by Adam Syed

I have to say

with all the defamatory crap coming from the SPLC and the ADL, I'm a bit suspicious about all this Holocaust stuff, etc being injected into


The Eleventh Day of Every Month


I think that it is imperative, CRUCIAL, that we all strictly hold unto what I call "the presumption of good will".

All of us are fundamentally on the same side, we want to truth about 9/11 to come out. And yes, we do disagree on a lot of issues. And what comes to my mind is something Saint Augustine once wrote:

"Unity in the essential, freedom in the debatable, and love in everything"

I think that it is important that we all refrain not only from calling each other names, but even from implying that the person we disagree is somehow malevolent or ill-intentioned. I think we should ALWAYS assume that the folks we disagree with are fundementally honest, decent, and well-intentioned people who might be mistaken, or even deluded, just as we ourselves might be mistaken and deluded.

I ask both of you, and everybody else, to forget past offenses and to simply forgive. I know, it sounds quaint and archaic, but forgiving each other is still an indispensable part of love, the one thing which we all need so much in the frightening times we all live in.

I am sorry that my post here on the topic of the Israeli involvment in 9/11 is triggering personal attacks. I new that this topic is explosive, but that is also the point: we will never be able to get to the bottom of what happened on 9/11 if we allow the role of Israel in the 9/11 events to remain such a "hot button", explosive issue. When we fight each other over it, THEY GET AWAY.

So let's discuss this topic on its ihnerent merits (or lack thereof) and not allow any emotions, nevermind hard feelings, to distract us from the pursuit of the truth,

I agree it's really important

and I think it's unfortunate that the topic was started with this podcast. It doesn't offer any evidence whatsoever of what it's claiming it just opens up some whole other can of worms. But it's been enlightening talking about it, so no harm no foul. I just think if you want a serious discussion about possible Israeli complicity in 9/11 you need to start with better source material.


The Eleventh Day of Every Month

It's a difficult call

I think that it is important that we all refrain not only from calling each other names, but even from implying that the person we disagree is somehow malevolent or ill-intentioned. I think we should ALWAYS assume that the folks we disagree with are fundamentally honest, decent, and well-intentioned people who might be mistaken, or even deluded, just as we ourselves might be mistaken and deluded.

There are certainly people who are attempting to spread disinformation in the Truth Movement. Cass Sunstein calls this cognitive infiltration and the introduction of cognitive diversity. One threat is that people might be led to embrace a false concept and use it as the central part of their argument. When the error is exposed the conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job becomes discredited in the mind of the audience.

Another danger is that people might file court cases in the name of 9/11 Truth but which are not representative of the movement. These cases could be significantly flawed, intentionally in order to poison the waters for legitimate cases. Some participants may even be misled into believing the merits of the case, and thereby become unwitting dupes of the effort to undermine the movement.

Questioning the authenticity of motives of participants in the movement is a dangerous game. People have attempted that as a means of discrediting people such as Steven E. Jones. It clearly hasn't worked, but it happened. In that case it was people attempting to undermine the movement. OTOH, we might be suspicious of people who are sincere, but do not hold our own views. Voicing those suspicions can cause a lot of controversy and infighting.

There are also cases where people want to exclude others based of our beliefs and positions regarding certain controversial topics. It has happened to me. I was accused of posting material about a controversial subject. From other contexts I was known to hold the unorthodox position, though I had not expressed as much on the forum from which I was banned. Others raised the topic, claiming that I had. When I attempted to direct them to a more appropriate venue for that discussion, I was "outed" and banned.

The people who did that have accounts on 911blogger. You will not be on their smiley list.


also dismisses CD of the WTC as being a pseudo-scientific claim.

Sure they do

But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not holocaust revisionism belongs on a 9/11 truth site or not. I think it doesn't.


The Eleventh Day of Every Month

Then why do you keep talking about it?

You are the one who brought up the topic. I hesitate to refer you to the ancient, original and time-honored definition of an Internet troll.

I'm through with you

Please refer to our exchange below.

see ya


The Eleventh Day of Every Month

Adam...get with the program or I'm finding you doubtful?

really YT is doing the work here and many are f%$king him about...why?

Regards John

get with THE program?

Who, exactly determines what THE program is? And what is THE program? Perhaps we should consult Fox News to find out?

Too elaborate...

Not trying to tell any what to do, but is it not prudent to question theses people their assertions and their associations way YT is?

For the good of the movement?

This is the heavy lifting that people like YT(Cosmos) do day to day, which has made us a lot more powerful by watching our backs while we move forward.

When I said "get with the program" the "program" I talk of is the one in "pursuit of the truth".


That's a typical ADL SPLC tactic

YT is part of the crowd who labeled me "racist" and banned me from several 9/11 forums. Just don't tell my Afro-Jamaican girlfriend. These people think they have the right to sully people and cast negative aspersions in order to control what we do and say. First through innuendo and insinuation, they associate what we say with someone like David Duke or Ernst Zuendel (under the forgone conclusion that these are disgraceful associations) then they bully us into submission or have us banned from forums on the basis of these associations. Facts be damned!

Cynthia McKinney recently said something rather stunning regarding the Administration's villainizing white supremacists:

Cynthia McKinney: Munich Peace Speeches

However, according to Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, certain Whites also constitute part of the problem: according to her they are environmentalists and white supremacists. Interestingly, hatred spewing from the likes of special interest television hosts seems OK as long as they buy into the Republican/Democrat political paradigm and stay there.

Napolitano’s enemies of the state, White supremacists and environmentalists, left that conformist paradigm over two generations ago. And I believe that any of us who leave that paradigm, and begin to think for ourselves and then act politically on our own independent, critical analysis can begin to put our country on the road to real independence from the special interests that have overtaken every aspect of our governmental, legal, and political apparatus, and like a parasite, has sapped the life from our body politic.

As you have already seen, I have urged caution regarding this topic. But seeing these brown-shirt tactics being used again in an attempt to bully people into conformity really bothers me. These are the tactics of the ADL and the SPLC. Mind you, if you attempted to have a seat at the table over at, you would not be welcome if you attempted honestly to uphold your position. Been there, done that.

Brownshirt tactics, eh?

That's funny, I thought the Brownshirts broke windows, cracked skulls and killed people. Did my words really hurt you that bad? I guess you're all for free speech... unless it's an opinion that you don't like? Then you're being attacked by Brownshirts. That's a really cute ad hominem to make in the context of this discussion, but I think it only serves to trivialize the history of bloodshed and repression of the Nazi regime. If you're going to accuse me of "being part of the crowd who labeled [you] 'racist' and banned [you] from several 9/11 forums", you should at least have the decency to reveal your identity.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

As I said: take to War on You

See here . I won't waste my time on a board where you and your cronies have moderation powers.


You've leveled an accusation against me. To be fair and decent, you should identify yourself (ie the name you were using during my alleged wrongdoing) so I at least know what you're talking about. Either that or retract it and apologize. I am not a moderator here.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

I don't need the public defamation again

If you know the nym I used, you will know my real name. I don't need the public defamation leveled against me again. Thanks, but no thanks.

Well then

I guess you can defame me publicly and make up any kind of accusations you want about my alleged previous dealings with you and no one will be able to verify it one way or the other. But I'm pretty sure this kind of nonsense is against the policies of this website, so you might as well stop while you're behind. I really hope you're not the "YT is a Jew" guy.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

He accepts a world view that you enforece and I reject

I think it's downright creepy that he quickly tops this evidence-free assertion by calling for Israel to be wiped off the face of the planet and even implying that all Jews might need to be done away with in order to save the USA. Does he really think that the fact that he has a Jewish grandparent makes this kind of bigotry and warmongering OK? Incredible.

Since your ability to enforce your world view precludes me from expressing my own, I cannot explain this further than to say that his remarks reflect an acceptance of a false history which you enforce adherence to.

Let's be real clear

You've labeled me a nazi for expressing my opinion in a perfectly civil manner.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

Take it elsewhere

I'm through with this on 911blogger. If you have something further to say on this matter, take it to War on You, they have an extremely liberal moderation policy. My objections to your tactics are note here. It would be inappropriate to continue this discussion on this site.

Yes, we're done here

Though I won't be joining you at your site.


The Eleventh Day of Every Month

set up

Holocaust Denial Versus 9/11 Truth

The association of challenges to the official myth of 9/11 with deniers of the Nazi Holocaust of Jews is one of the more potent weapons in the arsenal of the apologists for the official myth, although its use so far has been limited. In a column in Scientific American attacking the 9/11 "conspiracy theories" Michael Shermer states:

The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking (as well as creationism, Holocaust denial and the various crank theories of physics).

Following this, Shermer launches into a straw-man attack against 9-11 Research implying that the website embraces the same "conspiratorial thinking" as Holocaust denial, despite the fact that 9-11 Research does not endorse Holocaust denial or Holocaust revisionism, and avoids uncritically linking to websites that do.

It is easy to find writers and websites that openly mix 9/11 skepticism with Holocaust denial or revisionism. Some of the more prominent ones are:

* Christoper Bollyn, writer for The American Free Press
* The American Free Press , part of a parent organization that includes the Hitler-praising Barnes Review
* Eric Hufschmid, the author of influential books and videos about the 9/11 attack.
* , a site that highlights the Waco massacre, speculates about 9/11 conspiracies, and promotes neo-Nazi websites
* , a site with extensive links to and

In January of 2007 CNN devoted a segment of Paula Zahn NOW to attacking all 9/11 'conspiracy theorists' as racists who assert that Jews were behind the attack.

Funny you should mention the topic, yet again in this thread

Strange that, eh Vic?

Former director of studies, US Army War College

"Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D, University of Michigan) is a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran and a former director of studies at the US Army War College."

Whether we agree with none, some or all of what he said (I;m with some), it is significant coming from a person with his background. He is clearly emotionally torn by his new understanding of this significant historical event. I suspect he will moderate his rhetoric when he realized that he is not alone in the effort to uncover the truth. And he shouldn't worry about Americans, or anybody rounding up his Jewish kinsmen. It's not likely to happen - unless the Rothschilds fund it. I can certainly understand how he might feel especially betrayed.

I don;t think it would hurt the movement to

attempt contact with Dr. Sabrosky and ask him to expand on his views in this matter with hopefully some supporting documentation or logic etc. I think most people in this blog would agree that the "mossad" or it's affiliates have left some fingerprints in this crime.

I'm more interested in his comments about Israel

It might be interesting to find out the basis of his conclusion that Mossad was responsible for 9/11. We might gain a lot of insight if he knows things the rest of us don't. It may be the other way around. There is enough in the public domain to lead one to conclude Mossad was involved. I wonder how much he has looked into 9/11. Some of us have dedicated many of our waking hours to the subject for years.

To hear his comments, he seems to be just waking up to 9/11 Truth. I would like to hear more about his bombastic statement toward his Jewish kinsmen. He sounded sincere, and simply angry and hurt.

Perhaps better communication could defuse such extremist rhetoric?

Perhaps you would be interested in

Benjamin H. Freedman.

Interesting chap, Freedman

Yes, I have heard what Freedman had to say. I don't want to go to far into that brier-patch on this site. In my opinion, the people Freedman was talking about thrive on being hated, and on hatred in general. That's my take on Herzl. I'd better shut up now.